Hacker News Reader

Comment by germinalphrase | Hacker News Reader

Would you attribute this higher rate of part time work to a strong social welfare system in the Netherlands or to some other factor?

View on HN

Here are some "anecdata" from my 6 years working in the Netherlands:

* 4 day weeks are very common: I worked for a Dutch Bank for 3 years. Virtually all the Dutch "full time" staff worked 4 day weeks. The deal was work 10% less (36 instead of 40 hours), extend the working day a notional one hour on Monday to Thursday, and take every Friday off. Not bad for a 10% reduction in salary. And since everyone does it - even senior managers - there is no loss in promotion prospects.

* High levels of self-employment as independent contractors - "ZZP-ers" - zelfstandig zonder personeel (self-supporting without employees), often from mid-career professionals taking redundancy packages and setting up for themselves with greater flexibility for work-life balance at often slightly lower take home pay.

* Strong social net, health system, pension provision, social housing, etc, mean most Dutch people have very little to worry about. They can afford to prioritise enjoying life over being a slave to their employer.

One final anecdote concerns my local cafe in Amsterdam... In Melbourne, the equivalent cafe opened at 6:30am and was busy by 7am. The one near me in Amsterdam opened at 8:29am (yes, not 8:30...). When I asked why they didn't open earlier, the owner said the staff didn't want to start that early, and neither did he.

The ZZP idea is particularly intriguing to me. Do you think this is a direct result of the strong social net, or a sense of independence that existed in Dutch culture before benefits?

An additional factor is employment laws give strong protection to full time workers. As the economy recovered after the 2008 financial crisis, employers found it cheaper and less risky to use more flexworkers.

Flexworkers come in two main categories:

- Uitzendkracht - agency workers, hired via an employment bureau such as Adecco, Randstat.

- ZZP-ers - often independent consultants, in many cases starting with a former employer as their initial client.

It's the equivalent of working as a contractor. The main benefit is that you pay less taxes into the social welfare system, primarily a ZZP'er doesn't have to pay into a pension fund. The government tries to make being a ZZP'er advantageous, as it is perceived as being great for the economy.

A lot of ZZPers aren't really self employed. As an example, an Uber driver would be a ZZPer therefore avoiding certain rights and laws a normal employee would have. Another example would be MLM such as a Tupperware salesman. They also don't get pension.

What 'strong social net' are people referring to in this thread? As an independent contractor ('zzp'), you don't get unemployment benefits, no insurance against not being able to work and you have to get your own health insurance like everyone else. 'Bijstand'? I mean, that's food stamp level, and you can't have any assets to be eligible in the first place.

HN has a core belief that many EU countries have an immensely more generous social safety net than the US despite the US having welfare, social security, Medicaid and Medicare, food stamps, etc.

Having lives in Canada for many years, I didn’t find it that different than the US with the exception of healthcare.

Well to be fair, I think that most people in many EU countries think the same, until they actually learn the details or find themselves experiencing it...

> HN has a core belief that many EU countries have an immensely more generous social safety net than the US despite the US having welfare, social security, Medicaid and Medicare, food stamps, etc.

It is an simple fact that a number of EU countries have an immensely more generous social safety net than the US, even with the US having some basic support for families with dependent children in poverty, a minimal safety net pension, some minimal provision for the medically indigent, some basic provision for health care for aged ex-workers, and a system of food support for the poor.

> Having lives in Canada for many years, I didn’t find it that different than the US with the exception of healthcare.

Even assuming that the claim made here based on the flimsiest of claims of authority was correct, it is irrelevant, Canada is not even an EU member, much less a country they supports any generalization about the EU.

What time do cafes usually close in Amsterdam?

Because it seems that the standard in Australia and NZ is for cafes to open early and close early, at around 3pm or 4pm.

(Australian living in Amsterdam)

Anecdotally, most cafes close at 5pm here. When I was in Melbourne earlier this year I found the 3/4pm close times a little inconvenient based on what I’m used to here.

On the flip side, very few places are open for coffee or breakfast out before 8am.

(ex-Melbournian living in London/Amsterdam with a sister who owned cafes in Melbourne ...)

In Melbourne there are two kinds of cafes (to overgeneralize):

- Those in areas with nightlife are open at least 07:00-22:30 (e.g. The Fitz, Marios in Brunswick St, Brunetti's in Carlton). Most customers sit down for meals or coffee and cake. They have full restaurant-style kitchens and make their margins from a traditional food menu and serving wine with dinner.

- Those in office areas are typically open 06:30-15:00 for breakfast and lunch and maybe an early afternoon coffee. They often operate out of smaller premises, have just a couple of tables, and most customers take-away. They make most of their margin from coffee. Food is simple - sandwiches, soup and salads - because they have minimal kitchen areas.

My sister used to own one of these cafes that closed at 3pm. After previously owning a hotel that was a very full 24x7 job, they decided to live in a rural area outside Melbourne to build their own house. Owning this type of cafe was attractive because they would be home by the time their kids got out of school.

Low labor participation in women. The part timers are overwhelmingly women, in a 'typical' household, the man works full time and the woman 2 or 3 days (especially once there are children, but even before that). This effect is even more pronounced in higher educated women, who can afford this arrangement. There are many research papers about this topic but there is no clear reason. The most common conclusion is that it's cultural; Dutch women strongly feel that mothers are best suited to raise children.

Considering millions of years of evolution shaped female brains to be the primary caregivers, isn't this a common sense approach and explanation for the behavior?

I don't know, I tried my hardest to keep my post non-normative - it's basically a factual one paragraph summary of every goverment report on this of the last 15 years. In the context of the overall thread, the underlying point is that 'nr of hours worked' is only one data point, and is only meaningful when interpreted for a well defined purpose and when considered with many other factors.

Not a complete response to your question, but at least it is very common for families to to have both parents working part time (eg. four days each) and pay for childcare only for the remaining days. In countries where it's more common to have one full time salary in a family, the average working time per worker would be higher.

inlove that that is a common arrangement for parents. Do businesses accommodate a reduction in hours to facilitate this?

We’re not very accommodating of parenthood here in the US. Medical costs aside, my employer only offers two weeks of paid parental leave after having a child.

In short: yes, many businesses facilitate this.

Ironically, Dutch paternity leave is only 2 days (paid), but you’re legally allowed to take something like 26 weeks unpaid in the first few years as parental leave. (Vs e.g. Sweden with 6-9 months). The law is changing to a few weeks next year I believe.

I think it differs by employer. Mine gives extra days paid leave for parents as they consider the 2 days too short (but this is uncommon) and proactively asked if I was considering 90% or 80% for the coming year, and shared how others have done this.

At my wife’s workplace there are many people with children, and the large majority works either 3 or 4 days per week.

Two weeks is common in the US; however, it tends to be all-or-nothing with regard to hours.

If you are lucky, that is. Other places will give 6 weeks at reduced pay, but many others give absolutely no paid time off for maternity leave and fewer give paternity leave. I think FMLA allows for around 4-6 weeks of unpaid time off if your employer is large enough to be covered by it. Otherwise, your results could very easily vary.

That really depends on the employer. One large US employer I know of (Cisco) offers full salary for something like five or six months, and also offers grandparent leave.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com